Mark Sewards
MP for Leeds South West and Morley · Labour · United Kingdom
“I am reminded—especially today of all days, after the Prime Minister’s final Question Time—that it was the Prime Minister who went to the Jewish community in April and made two promises: first, that the legislation would be brought forward in the King’s Speech and prioritised; and secondly, that he would use it to designate the IRGC.”
“I have 60 minutes to make 60 points—no, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will speak very briefly, as I feel I have already taken enough of the House’s time on this issue. I commend the Government for bringing forward the National Security (State Threats) Act 2026 and for designating the IRGC almost as soon as it received Royal Assent.”
“The right hon. Gentleman tempts me, but I am not going to take the offer. The IRGC is a direct threat to the safety of the British-Jewish community. We have known that for a long time, and unfortunately the evidence has stacked up as the years have rolled on.”
“As I make the short journey over to the parliamentary Labour party office to nominate my right hon. Friend the Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham), in the spirit of unifying behind out next leader, to succeed the Prime Minister—assuming this debate is done by 6 pm— I place on record my thanks to the person who delivered this historic Lab…”
“The hon. Member is making a good speech on the risks associated with extreme heat. I had the good fortune of being a maths teacher in a brand-new school building in 2023 in Leeds. Just before the building opened, the builders showed us around the place, and I asked how the building would be kept cool.”
“I had the pleasure of watching England versus DR Congo with some of the good folks at the Campaign to Ban Trophy Hunting. Thankfully, the England men’s team have not taken the title of the campaign too literally, and are still on the hunt to bring at least one trophy home this summer.”
The complete record
Every one of 477 lines we hold for Mark Sewards, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 10.
“The hon. Gentleman is making an excellent speech on an incredibly difficult topic. Next month, I am bringing two mums from Leeds down to meet the Victims Minister. They tragically lost their babies in different circumstances, but both went to the same funeral director, who did horrific things with their babies’ bodies. The police found nothing actionable because there is no regulation of the funeral industry. That needs to change. The hon. Gentleman talks about the public’s reaction, so does he agree that the more cases that come to light, the more the public realise what is possible in the funeral sector right now and the louder their calls for regulation will grow? I urge the Minister to recognise the urgent need to address this issue.”
“The politicians, civilians and soldiers I spoke to last month in Kyiv were unambiguous when asked what was the best thing the UK could do to help them win the war. The hundreds of billions of dollars of frozen Russian assets that they currently cannot deploy could help them bolster their military and swing the war decisively in their favour. On their behalf, will the Foreign Secretary use every power available to her to unlock those assets and put them in the service of the people of Ukraine?”
“I warmly welcome the £20 million for Old Farnley, but now is the time for action. Hundreds of people have already completed my survey. I have more than 100 volunteers for the neighbourhood board alone—it will not be that big—and we have plenty of ideas that we want to spend the money on. Given that we are ready and impatient to deliver, will the Minister empower my residents to crack on and spend this money and deliver the change that we know they deserve?”
“I pay tribute to the Leeds Jewish Representative Council and the Jewish Leadership Council for organising moving tributes in memory of the victims of the Manchester attack. I also thank CST for its tireless work to keep the community safe. I am sorry to say that a few weeks ago a speaker on the streets of Leeds during one of the protests called for all synagogues and all Jewish schools to be held to account for the crime of, as they say, harbouring Zionists. This was the thinnest of veils draped over an excuse to legitimise targeting the Jewish community. Does the Home Secretary agree that there is absolutely no place for such calls on the streets of Leeds or anywhere in the UK? Will she do everything in her power to enable the police to ensure that it does not happen again to keep the Jewish community safe?”
“The Minister will be aware of the plight of Zoe Ward and Cody Townend, two mums from Leeds who tragically lost babies in different circumstances but who both went to the same funeral director, who did not treat their babies’ bodies with the dignity, care or respect that they deserved. Despite the shocking details of these cases, the police found nothing actionable because the funeral sector is not regulated in any way. Will the Minister commit to meeting Zoe, Cody and me to discuss these horrific cases, but also to talk about how quickly we can regulate the law in this area to ensure that what happened to them never happens to anyone ever again?”
“I urge the Minister to exempt BNO visa holders from any changes to the ILR route or other qualifications for settled status. This country made a promise to the people of Hong Kong, and we should honour it.”
“It is also true that a huge number of Hongkongers in the UK are working far below their qualification or training levels, or are potentially unemployed entirely. There are accountants, journalists and engineers, for example, working in roles that do not necessarily match their skills. We have heard that there are some practical steps that the Government could take to alleviate some of those problems, which would be in our interests, but extending the ILR route for Hongkongers to 10 years—further delaying their access to further education, training, citizenship, Government support and integration into UK society—will obviously make the problem worse. Despite all the obstacles they face today, they are still making a huge contribution to the UK. With one eye on the time, I will draw my remarks to a close.”
“Currently, BNOs represent about 1.65% of total visa grants, so changing the rules in this area will do very little to change immigration trends. More importantly, the Hong Kong community make an immense contribution to the UK, even though they are often prevented from giving their full talents to society because of the limitations they face without settled status or citizenship. Take university-age students, for example, who we have heard about today: without settled status, they will not qualify for home fees, making university unaffordable for most of them. Delaying that settled status for a total of 10 years would have a hugely detrimental impact on those young BNO visa holders. They will still go on to contribute to the UK throughout their working lives, but why would we not want to increase that contribution as much as we can?”
“To change the rules now, when the first BNO visa holders are just months away from qualifying for settled status, would be a devastating blow to the Hong Kong community. It would constitute a broken promise. These people have come to the UK under a set of conditions that we determined, and at our request. At the very least, even if we were to change the rules, they should never be applied retrospectively. What would happen if we did change the rules? First, extending the indefinite leave to remain period for BNO visa holders would have very little impact on immigration figures. Government data shows that most BNO visa holders arrived in the first two years of the scheme, between 2021 and 2023, and, since then, the numbers have been falling.”
“I need to make it very clear that we must take extremely strong action on immigration—the British people demand it—and that having functioning borders should be a basic function of the state. The level of immigration to the UK, both legal and illegal, has been too high, and the White Paper is a decent package of measures to try to bring the numbers down, which should be welcomed. However, we do not want to unfairly penalise those who we have invited here, or who make a huge contribution to the UK. When the BNO visa scheme was introduced in 2020 by the previous Government, it was in response to the imposition of the national security law on Hongkongers, to help them escape political repression.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship today, Mr Pritchard. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for South Norfolk (Ben Goldsborough) on his opening remarks, and I welcome my hon. Friend the Minister to his place. Earlier this year, I held a surgery with Hongkongers living in my constituency, alongside Alison Lowe, the deputy mayor of West Yorkshire, who is responsible for policing and crime. While I was so pleased to see the room absolutely packed out—standing room only—it was clear from the questions I was being asked that the No. 1 concern was the immigration White Paper and its potential impact on Hongkongers and their families—people we invited to live here.”
“Cody Townend and Zoe Ward are two mums from Leeds who tragically lost babies in different circumstances. Cody lost Macie-Mae earlier this year, and Zoe lost Bleu four years ago. They both went to the same funeral director who, to their horror, kept their babies’ bodies in her private home without their consent and did not treat them with the respect and dignity they deserved. The BBC revealed more shocking details about this case last week, which I will not repeat now. Given that the police found nothing actionable in either case because there is no regulation of the funeral industry, meaning that anyone—anyone—can be a funeral director, will the Leader of the House grant an urgent debate in Government time on the need to regulate the funeral industry, so that no one has to experience what Cody and Zoe did ever again?”
“Listening to the Conservative Front Bench spokesperson, one would think that everything was fine and rosy in education before the previous election, and that everything would have been fine if only the Conservatives had been given one more chance. Compare and contrast that with what we have delivered in our first year in Government: 30 hours of free childcare, actually funded; free breakfast clubs; cheaper school uniforms on the way; best start family hubs; and of course—”
“Will the Minister join me in encouraging parents in my constituency of Leeds South West and Morley to take advantage of everything this Government have done to make the lives of parents and children easier?”
“We have already discussed Lords amendments 1 and 8, which propose to stop hereditary peer by-elections and stop any vacancies being filled, although they would still allow current hereditary peers to stay in the Lords, allowing their numbers to grow smaller and smaller as they gradually begin to leave. If passed, the amendments would leave the current crop of hereditary peers in the Second Chamber for years and years—indeed, in some cases, as we have heard, for decades—but the entire purpose of the Bill is to remove them immediately, because of the principle that underpins our decision to make this change.”
“I rise to speak to all the Lords amendments, but I will go into more detail on Lords amendments 1, 2, 3 and 8. I am pleased that the Bill is making progress, and I look forward to seeing it on the statute book as soon as possible. We are one step closer to fulfilling yet another manifesto pledge. I welcome Lords amendments 4, 5, 6, 7 and 9 for the reasons already set out. They will allow Members of the other place who lose capacity to retire with the dignity that they deserve. It is clearly a sensitive and complex problem, and I congratulate the Government on finding a solution that received unanimous cross-party support in the other place. I hope it will receive the same cross-party unanimous support in this place today.”
“I congratulate the hon. Lady for having so many friends in the other place. I could not agree with her more—it is almost as if she has read my speech and hence made her timely intervention.”
“All I would say is, “Long live the King.” What we do with our hereditary peers today does not affect what we do with our monarchy. As I was saying, no one should serve in the other place and make our laws simply because of the family that they were born into. No one should—not them, not me, not my children and not theirs. That is a basic principle that I hope we can all get behind.”
“Life peers, too, will go on to make excellent contributions and scrutinise our laws carefully using their relevant expertise and knowledge—given that they are often selected because of their expertise and knowledge, and not in the cynical way that the shadow Front Bench and others were suggesting earlier. Even if they do not, it is a life appointment, not one based on blood that they can pass down to the next generation, so I think that the system of life peerages is the better way to go. If Opposition Members genuinely believe that the hereditary peers who will lose their places because of this legislation should still be in the other place, they can ensure that the Leader of the Opposition, whoever that is, submits their names to make them a life peer.”
“The principle I am talking about applies specifically to the two Chambers that make and scrutinise our laws, submit amendments and so on. The idea that some people should be allowed a say in that process because of the family they were born into is alien to me. The House of Lords should have been abolished years ago. I am glad that the Government are finally taking the steps to remove that principle. I am certain that decent arguments can be made for the contributions of hereditary peers being good ones, often with the nuance and expertise that comes with dedicated service in the other place. I have no doubt that we will hear such arguments today, but the same is true of those who are appointed as life peers—at least when political parties fulfil their responsibilities and choose appropriate people for the roles.”
“More than 20 positions are available already and, as time goes on, more will become available. It will be up to the Leader of the Opposition to make that decision.”
“My hon. Friend made the point extremely well. I have had to deal with this on a number of issues, including introducing VAT on private schools, for example, where Members came to this place, argued the point and said that we had no right to do it—yet it was in our manifesto, so we have a moral obligation to pass this legislation. I hope that Opposition Members will join us in the lobbies as we do so. [ Interruption. ] The hon. Member for Brentwood and Ongar (Alex Burghart) chunters from a sedentary position, but I am more than happy to take an intervention, if he wishes to make one.”
“Speaking about Lords reform more broadly, which has come up during the debate, I was pleased to read in Lords Hansard that Baroness Smith has suggested that a Select Committee, set up in the other place, could be used to examine a mandatory retirement age and minimum participation requirements, which I know many Members in this House support. The suggestion included a timeframe: set the Committee up within three months of the Bill receiving Royal Assent and it will report back next year, so we can make real progress on the other commitments. I wholeheartedly endorse that approach and look forward to the outcome of this work.”
“Therefore, the power already exists and the need to clarify that power is unnecessary. Lord True mentioned that the newly clarified power could be used to honour people without swelling the ranks of the House of Lords. However, as we have already heard, if we want to recognise special contributions to public life, there are already plenty of ways to do that, such as knighthoods, damehoods, OBEs, CBEs and so on. I maintain that life peerages should be reserved for those who actively participate in the work of the House of Lords, and I therefore urge the House to disagree with Lords amendment 3.”
“This Bill is specific, narrow and focused. If we want to have a conversation about those salaries, we need to allocate far more time to that and consider separate legislation, so I will not be supporting Lords amendment 2. I had to do quite a bit of reading around the subject to understand Lords amendment 3. I understand that Lord True, the leader of the Opposition in the House of Lords, wanted to clarify the power of the monarch to confer a life peerage that is granted without a right to a seat in the House of Lords. The creation of a new form of life peerage without any kind of parliamentary responsibility is unnecessary—I will take interventions, as I am happy to have this point clarified—because, quite simply, the King already has that power. He used it when he granted his brother, Prince Edward, the title of Duke of Edinburgh.”
“The Labour party has a moral obligation to fulfil our manifesto pledges, and I am confident that during our five-year term we will make great progress on everything that we set out in that document. I have argued that Lords amendment 1 undermines the core purpose of the Bill and is entirely inconsistent with our commitment to remove hereditary peers from the other place. Lords amendment 2 is an attempt to ensure that in future all Ministers who sit in the House of Lords are paid a salary. Having read Lords Hansard , I know that this is a well-intentioned amendment and I can see why the Lords have submitted it. However, ministerial salaries are determined by the Ministerial and Other Salaries Act 1975, so any proposals to change them should be made through amendments to that Act rather than through this Bill.”
“The right hon. Gentleman’s point is well made and I will be following the work of the Select Committee closely. We have already heard names mentioned of people who are over the age of 80 and still making great contributions, so I will follow the Committee’s work closely before making a final judgment on the issue. More broadly than the work that the Committee will undertake, once this Bill has become law, I will continue to advocate for a second Chamber that is more representative of our nations and regions.”
“The Bill shows our determination to make our democracy stronger and more representative, and it should be just the start of our commitment to reform the other place and improve our ability to do what we were all sent here to do: serve the public.”
“We should be as bold as possible and do the difficult work now, because we were elected to do the difficult work in this term and set out an ambitious plan for the wholesale replacement of the other Chamber, ready to be made up of people from all our nations and regions. It should be a truly democratic body that draws on the same golden thread that should always exist between the people we serve in this place and those who should sit in a second elected Chamber. [ Interruption. ] Hon. Members chunter that this point is off topic; I probably agree, because the Bill does not cover that. I will draw my remarks to a close. The Bill in front of us will remove the archaic right of somebody to sit in Parliament because of the family they were born into; I find that principle very hard to disagree with.”
“The hon. Gentleman chunters from a sedentary position. When it comes to Scotland, the figure is about 2% or 3%—I cannot recall the actual figures, but I will check. The point remains that we have to make the House of Lords more representative of our nations and regions. We could address this issue in a piecemeal way, in the same way that we have addressed the hereditary issue over many decades. We could slowly introduce reform after reform on who gets appointed, where they come from, what proportion have to come from Yorkshire and so on, but I am not a fan of that approach.”
“I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement and reiteration that we will always support the people of Ukraine. Given Russia’s despicable attack against civilian targets in Kyiv, costing the lives of over 20 civilians including children and damaging a British Council building, it is quite clear that Vladimir Putin has very little interest in any legitimate peace process. Given that reports differ about how committed countries are to deploying troops in Ukraine to enforce any potential peace agreement, can the Secretary of State set out how the UK is working with our allies to convince them to back security guarantees and peace in Ukraine, and will he state that there is nothing that Vladimir Putin can do now to deter our support for Ukraine?”
“However, we have to go further, we have to go faster, we have to increase the number of police and we have to increase the powers available to them, too. Will the Leader of the House grant a debate on that in Government time, and perhaps encourage the other place to send our Crime and Policing Bill back as soon as possible so that we can do just what I have mentioned?”
“Last Friday, I met business owners who operate in Morley Bottoms and who have managed to turn one of the most undesirable parts of our town into one of the destinations that people travel into Morley to experience. Madam Deputy Speaker, you have an invitation to come along and join me any time, as does the Leader of the House, and the first round is on me. Those business owners are, however, victims of their own success. Unfortunately, a spate of burglaries over the past few years has affected the businesses. We have met the police and are working with them to sort it out. I welcome the Government’s move to ensure that our town centres are protected this summer with increased police presence.”
“We have recommended that those agencies have clear processes in place, so that they can review and escalate concerns between different agencies, with a clear line of accountability and decision making to keep children safe and stop them falling through the gaps. Does my hon. Friend agree that it should be a priority for the Department to get those processes in place to prevent those children from falling through the gaps?”
“I am pleased to have contributed to this report as a member of the Education Committee, which is excellently led by my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes). I also thank the Clerks and staff for all their work on the Committee. It is good that the report has been welcomed by the Centre for Young Lives, the County Councils Network, as well as care leavers charities such as Become. Will my hon. Friend expand on the section of the report about keeping children safe? Evidence that we heard from our witnesses during the inquiry suggested that the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill was going to do a lot to address their concerns about keeping children in care safe. Despite that, we have still made recommendations about multi-agency working.”
“I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this incredibly important debate. In my eight and a half years as a maths teacher, teaching in inner city schools, I found that the problem was never just about a lack of aspiration but about a lack of access and a lack of knowledge; that goes for any group, not just for boys. Does he agree?”
“I warmly welcome today’s announcement. Sure Start was one of the greatest achievements of the last Labour Government, and these Best Start family hubs will build on that. As a member of the Education Committee, we have heard evidence that Sure Start was at its best when it was targeted and specific. Will the Secretary of State set out what criteria will determine where these new family hubs will be located, and what I might need to do to get one located in Leeds South West and Morley?”
“The TV Harrison football ground in my constituency is a historic part of Wortley. It is known as Wortley’s Wembley, and Leeds United legends such as David Batty and Paul Reaney used to train and play on it. However, after being abandoned over recent decades, it was at risk of being lost forever. After a six-year campaign by local residents, I am pleased to say that the ground has been saved. For my part, I have spent three of those years working with the owners and residents to get a new owner for the site. I am pleased to announce that that new owner is Leeds United. I am incredibly pleased that that football club has chosen to invest in our constituency and, in addition, will restore the ground to its former glory. Will the Leader of the House join me in paying tribute to everyone involved in this campaign and to Leeds United?”
“May I briefly commend the Health Secretary for his comments on the morning media about events in this place yesterday? Empathy is in short supply in politics, and we could do with a bit more of it. I really welcome the 10-year health plan, and specifically the focus on outcomes and the transformation of the NHS into a neighbourhood health service, complete with health centres. The plan states the criterion for deciding the first locations of these health centres: they will be the areas with the greatest need. Will the Health Secretary expand on that criterion, and perhaps tell me what I need to do to get a health centre for Leeds South West and Morley?”
“I warmly welcome the Minister’s statement. As a dad, I know from two very recent experiences how valuable paternity leave is for fathers. Good companies also know that, as Tesco and other good employers have already increased their employee paternity leave offers because they know that a good workforce is a happy workforce. May I encourage the Minister to actively pursue those companies to ensure that their data and insights are fed into the review, with a view to permanently increased paternity leave?”
“I am tired, as are my residents, of being told that the mean average speed is too low to change things, even though people on those roads know through their lived experience that the outliers are causing all the problems. Does my hon. Friend agree?”
“My hon. Friend has done tremendously well tonight, and he has been so generous with his time. I am fortunate enough to represent two parish councils, one town council and numerous residents’ groups. Across my constituency, I have got dozens of councillors in Gildersome, Drighlington and Morley who obviously have the expert knowledge—the street-by-street knowledge, and in some cases the house-by-house knowledge—to make these decisions for themselves. My hon. Friend agrees that those councils should have the power to change speed limits in their area, so perhaps he would like to comment on the mean average speed tests that are often used to restrict speeding limits on certain roads? Maybe when she sums up, the Minister would also like to comment on that issue.”
“I welcome the Minister’s response to the urgent question. The purchase of 12 new F-35A aircraft will increase our nuclear capabilities and shows that our commitment to NATO is unshakeable. As the chair of the Yorkshire and North Lincolnshire all-party parliamentary group, I am always on the lookout for opportunities for growth in my region. Given that this announcement supports 20,000 jobs and places 15% of the global supply chain in the UK, will the Minister say how that will benefit my region and how she will ensure that all the investment, jobs and growth opportunities will be spread to each part of the UK?”
“A full-scale war between Israel and Iran is clearly in no one’s interests, but neither is a nuclear-armed Iran, so what is the Government’s realistic proposal to return to diplomatic solutions as soon as possible and to get Iran to give up its nuclear weapons programme? How realistic is it that Iran will engage in such an effort?”
“I associate myself with the comments made by the Minister, the shadow Foreign Secretary and many others from across the House in expressing condolences. My thoughts have been with the families, friends and the people who have lost loved ones in the Air India crash. I represent a lot of people in Leeds South West and Morley, including a group of wonderful families who organise under the name Morley Indians. They have sent me here today with a couple of questions for the Minister, so on behalf of one of their representatives may I ask what support are the UK Government providing for the families in the UK who have lost loved ones? In addition, what support can the Government provide to the wider community, following the impact of this horrific crash?”
“They are versatile and can run alongside road networks where needed, because they can be segregated from traffic to avoid congestion and improve journey times for passengers. Trams are also very consistent. That is why politicians have tried multiple times, without success, to bring mass transit back to Leeds. We have had everything: plans for trams; a trolleybus scheme; an elevated railway that was not dissimilar to the monorail in an episode of “The Simpsons”; and even, if we care to go back far enough, an underground proposal. That has left some people in my city highly sceptical of the announcement last week, because we have been burned too many times.”
“Leeds was often referred to as the “motorway city of the seventies”—I think that even appeared on a stamp—because we became entirely reliant on the car, which has held us back in some respects. There is only so much traffic that can be added to our roads before they have to be expanded, with new lanes added and traffic systems rethought—and often only for temporary benefit, before the next solution has to be considered. To their credit, policymakers and politicians figured that out—it is not something that we have just come to ourselves. Trams can carry approximately four times as many passengers as a typical bus, and they massively increase the transport capacity of any region.”
“Leeds is currently the largest city in Europe without a mass transit system—that is such a well-known fact that if I had been given £1 every time I heard it, I could have personally financed the mass transit system 10 years ago, with spare change for a space programme—but transport aficionados and Members from my part of the world will know that that was not always the case. Leeds had a horse-drawn tram as early as 1871, and at its peak the network—which did not have horses by that time—had 476 trams and 124 miles of track. But while the horses did not leave us completely, the trams did. What had once been one of the largest urban transport systems in the UK was finally closed down, and in 1959 we saw the end of our tram system.”
“I beg to move, That this House has considered Government support for mass transit in West Yorkshire. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. Last week, I was delighted to have secured this debate, and the confirmation of its date came through just an hour before the news that the Government will indeed be investing £2.1 billion in West Yorkshire’s public transport, including more than £1 billion for a new tram in Leeds and Bradford, so I am now even happier to have secured it and to be leading it. I will start with the background to that decision and explain why it is such a huge moment for my home city, Leeds, and for our home region of West Yorkshire.”
“Are they as optimistic as I am that the case for any second phase of the project will be even stronger once the impacts from the first phase are felt? I will be very grateful if the Minister takes those questions into account when she delivers her closing remarks. I put on the record my thanks and appreciation to all those who share our region’s ambition, and everyone who has supported this project. It gives me great pleasure to say that we will have spades in the ground for the tram in 2028, and that finally—finally—it is time for trams in West Yorkshire.”